Breaking news

Response by Defence over death of Afghan man

The Chief of Defence was not available for an interview with the ABC due to other commitments.

However the following response to 7:30 has been provided:

On 22 May 2012, Defence became aware of an allegation that a Special Operations Task Group (SOTG) member shot a person in September 2010 during tactical questioning, following a media enquiry.

In responding to the question, Defence identified an incident on 3 October 2010 involving an insurgent who was killed while threatening the life of an SOTG member.

That incident did not appear to relate to tactical questioning.

No investigation of the matter had occurred prior to News Limited submitting its questions or prior to the Senate Estimates Hearing of 28 May 2012.

The Chief of the Defence Force (CDF) was advised on the basis of information available at the time namely that in the incident Defence had identified, the insurgent was not shot during tactical questioning.

As CDF stated during the Senate Estimates Hearing on 28 May 2012, "As this process has gone on, the interaction between the journalist and the former ADF members [who spoke to the journalist] has thrown more issues up and we just need to check back how they fit next to incidents we were already aware of or whether they are new".

Following the media enquiry, Commander Joint Operations directed that a review be undertaken of the incident that occurred on 3 October 2010 in which an insurgent was killed while threatening an SOTG member.

Defence is concerned that the allegation was made a significant period of time after the event and that this delayed subsequent investigation. It is noted that ADFIS reported that material reflected an incorrect grid reference, however, ADFIS was able to identify the location.

It is important to note that the ADFIS investigation concluded that there was sufficient evidence to indicate that the SOTG member acted lawfully. ADFIS did not recommend any disciplinary or administrative action as a result of their investigation.

Defence notes that ADFIS reported a lack of cooperation from the unit involved, and is disappointed that they perceived this to be the case.

However it must be understood that ADFIS investigations are undertaken in accordance with the provisions of the Defence Force Discipline Act 1982, which similarly to civilian criminal law, does not require persons to answer questions.

The unit was required to report operational incidents to the chain of command and in fact did so on this occasion. Nevertheless, following actions initiated after the News Limited questions, the content of the initial reporting of the incident was found to be deficient.

Once the allegation was made in 2012, further inquiries and investigations were conducted in accordance with current processes, including notification to ADFIS.

Accordingly, Defence is satisfied that the allegation has been properly investigated.